Wainui angry over the cost of reticulation
Friday, 28 March 2008
By Marianne Gillingham

Anxious Wainui ratepayers yesterday confronted the council over being foisted with a reticulation system that is expected to cost at them least $26,000 each.

About 20 representatives attended the council's public forum.

They questioned the need for water and sewerage reticulation at Wainui and Okitu, and raising questions over affordability and the lack of consultation.

They were supported by letters from 360 Wainui-Okitu residents.

There was talk of grown men crying and people lying awake at night worrying about how they were going to pay for a system they said they neither wanted nor needed

Seven people presented in-depth submissions against the proposals.

Andrew Donaldson reiterated arguments over the lack of data supporting claims of groundwater contamination in the area. He also questioned whether the council had done any work on the increased flow of stormwater that would inevitably follow water reticulation and whether this would exacerbate erosion around streams.

He questioned whether the council was able to do any cost:benefit analysis without knowing the full costs.

Costings did not include interest, GST or the risk that resident population growth might not live up to projections. Nor did they include annual running costs.

Lloyd George Rd resident Peter Anderson produced test results that showed both Wainui Stream and Hamanatua Stream were polluted with faecal colliforms before they got to the residential area.

It was not too late for the council to work with residents towards a more sustainable solution, he said.

This had been done successfully by the Waitakare council for the Piha and Karekare communities.

Jenny Harre-Hindmarsh said most residents in the area had serious concerns about the processes the council had used up to now in the guise of "consultation".

The consultation had failed to outline any options to enable those affected to make any meaningful contributions.

What had taken place was the presentation of information to residents and a limited survey to which only 70 people had responded.

Residents were not "consulted" on the reticulation project until after the steering group had decided the preferred option. Then it came only just before the committee presented a draft report quoting costs of $2000-$5000 a household.

The final plan was never put to residents, who later read that the project was going ahead as per the steering group's preferred option and that this would cost the average ratepayer $26,000.

The community was appealing to the council to put a brake on the project and work with it to produce a fairer outcome, for the social and economic wellbeing of the community as well as the environmental wellbeing, she said.

Gary Stevenson used case studies to show the project would add $3500-$4000 a year to the average rates bill in the area.

There were 51 people in the area with no income other than superannuation.

Contrary to common perception, few people at Wainui had incomes of more than $55,000 a year. About 390 residents earned $30,000 a year or less.

He asked councillors how they would feel themselves about paying up to a third of their income in rates.

"It's an outrage," he said.

"It's something like extortion."

His wife Sharon Stevenson said there was an onus on the council to make decisions that were fair and equitable.

It did not seem fair to impose such a burden on those who could not afford it.

Many were losing sleep over the financial pressure it created. This sort of pressure would have a ripple effect in the community.

At least two elderly residents were already selling their homes because of it, homes in which they expected to live out their lives.

Former councillor Muriel Jones said it was time the council had a reality check on the plight of many of the elderly in this region. Then they might think twice about what they were imposing on this generation of ratepayers who were paying not only for the omissions of the past but also for the benefit of coming generations.

Mayor Meng Foon resumed the normal meeting agenda as soon as the residents had finished.

At least one councillor left the meeting to acknowledge their submissions and Pat Seymour called on the Mayor to explain the lack of response to bemused residents.

Chief executive Lindsay McKenzie said the forum was part of the council's protocols for engaging with the community.

The submissions were relevant to an item later in the agenda, in which the council would resolve to begin formal consultation with Wainui-Okitu as part of the adoption of the long-term council community plan.

Return to >> NEWS