Asset value

We accept the concerns Merepeka Raukawa-tait raised in a recent opinion piece regarding queues at our Rotorua service centre (Opinion, May 4). I apologise to those who have been affected.

We are remedying this as a matter of urgency.

We should have done more to eliminate the need for wha¯ nau to wait outside. It doesn’t reflect the service we are trying to provide to our wha¯ nau.

We are required to follow Covid19 requirements and tried different approaches to managing our social distancing requirements. We accept that we didn’t get this right.

We have reconfigured the service centre so that more wha¯ nau can safely be in the office at one time.

We will continue to encourage wha¯ nau to book appointments with our service centre staff and take advantage of the wide range of services we can provide online and via our call centres.

Mike Bryant, Regional Commissioner Ministry of Social Development

Reading the report (News, May 5) that Ka¯ inga Ora has bought Tauranga’s seven elder housing villages for $17.2m seems to me to be a great buy for Ka¯ inga Ora — but not necessarily for Tauranga ratepayers.

These seven villages are in prime city areas and have a total of 197 onebedroom units. Based on the amount they sold for, this equates to just $87,500 per dwelling, which includes both the land and the value of the buildings.

I would have thought that the land alone would have been worth in excess of $17.2m due to their location.

I am certain there would be many people who would be delighted to buy a one-bedroom unit for $87,500. It is this that makes me say it appears that Ka¯ inga Ora seems to have got a great buy.

Tauranga has huge issues and if we sell an asset there should be an expectation that the city should receive the maximum value of what the asset is worth.

Mike Baker Bethlehem