TDC Me

Your Say

Together we can achieve more

Mayor Votes Rate Hike For Dam

Mayor Kempthorne goes it alone and agrees to invest an extra $3 million in the Waimea dam project and to underwrite $25 million dollars of irrigator loan. Well, he voted alone using his Mayoral privilege to cast an extra vote in a hung council verdict, but the money comes from general ratepayers.

gold plated dam

A robust debate around the table followed a number of public speakers having their say on the dam.  The options presented to councillors were to vote for more money to take to the negotiation table or to walk away from the negotiation table causing the collapse of the project in negligence of our duty.

Councillor Wensley tried to present another motion where council remained at the negotiation table with the mandate to hold to council’s position as presented in the long-term plan 2015-2025. This was unable to be voted on without the failure of the tabled motion. A chance the Mayor scuttled.

Questions raised by this decision include:

  • Why is council around the negotiation table at the 11th hour trying to establish a business model for the dam?  It would have seemed to me to be good practice to have established Governance and funding responsibilities before spending millions of dollars of ratepayer money.
  • Now that council has over-committed itself in the business model negotiation phase of the dam, and the irrigators have been bled dry, who is going to pick up the tab for any inflation in quote price or construction over-runs?
  • Is there any point in this process where those pushing the dam would consider it too expensive as beneficial as it may be?

Ironically the last time council was deadlocked over a decision it was to do with setting the rates for the current year.  A number of councillors wanted a modest 1.5% percent rate increase this year to help pay down our mountain of debt. The Mayor and many of the others who voted for the extra dam spend said we had to hold the rates at the 0.6% because there are residents in the Tasman district who cannot afford to pay their rates, and Tasman is near the top of the rating table amongst our peer councils.

I asked where these poor people had gone, as over the next five years council will be struggling to maintain rate rises below the 3% cap — a total of 15% in five year’s time (actually 16% if you take the cumulative content into account). This is without any further overruns and assumes council has the ability to maintain the 3% cap.  I was not given an answer.

Those of us who voted against the motion were not voting against the dam. We were voting against the increasing of the council’s commitment over and above the increase that a percentage share would involve as per the business model presented to us when the current council was established.

The chance to vote yes or no on the dam is yet to come following a public consult. Theoretically, we will have more facts around the build cost of the dam, the level of contributions that all parties will be investing, and perhaps the cost of a viable plan B (however, inferior in benefit delivery).

I believe that all the facts should be on the table in order to make a fully informed decision. Inflated positions to persuade a decision one way or the other help no-one. If I am going to be held accountable for my decision (as I would expect to be) then it needs to be based on a lot more facts than have currently been tabled.

 

Volunteer Help And IRD

No Free Lunch says IRD!

It is common for people in our region to have volunteer helpers or WWOOFers staying, especially over the summer months. It is a happy arrangement for those looking to make their holiday money stretch a bit further while enjoying some real life Kiwi experiences, and the host families who get some much needed help at this time of year.

Unfortunately, there is another entity that may not have been invited to the party, but thinks they should be! Inland Revenue say that your volunteers are actually employees. The ramifications of this could be significant. This is what they say:

Is your volunteer actually an employee?

If you thought working for food or accommodation was volunteering, think again. By law, anyone working in return for food and accommodation is an employee.

Giving people a feed and a bed for doing odd jobs is common in New Zealand, eg travellers working on farms. But there are tax implications and employer duties you need to know about.

 Before they start

Before anyone can do any work for you, whether you’re paying them wages or providing food and a place to stay, make sure they’re allowed to work here. Only New Zealand citizens and permanent residents — and Australian citizens — can work in New Zealand without a visa. Everyone else needs one, eg a working holiday visa.

Also, your volunteers will have to fill out Inland Revenue’s tax code declaration (IR330) and get an IRD number.

Anyone who receives “gain or reward” for their work, eg food and accommodation, is in paid employment, which makes you their employer.

Your to-do list

For each volunteer you hire, you need to:

  • register as an employer
  • get a completed tax code declaration (IR330)
  • check if they are eligible to join KiwiSaver and if they should be automatically enrolled
  • create an employment agreement for a fixed-term or casual employee
  • work out and deduct PAYE from any wages
  • work out the PAYE on the market value of any accommodation you provide, or accommodation allowance you pay them
  • keep records of income and deductions, eg a wage book
  • file employer returns and pay PAYE to Inland Revenue.

Tell your insurance company you’ve taken on a new employee and want to add them to your policies.

This is to protect yourself in case something goes wrong, eg your volunteer gets injured while at work. It will likely cost you more, so you may want to contact an insurance broker for advice.

Employee rights

By law, any employee — including someone working for bed and board — has minimum rights, so make sure you understand them. It’s also your responsibility as their employer to protect employees at work.

For more information and to download the appropriate forms visit The Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment website.

Council Permits Building On The Estuary

Mayor On The Right Track – Yeah Right!

Perhaps the permitted house is not exactly “on” the estuary, as in you don’t need a boat or to wait until low tide to access it, but it is certainly encroaching on the estuary.

The estuary that DOC describes as:

waimea-inlet-DOC
Waimea-inlet-DOC

Waimea Inlet is the largest semi-enclosed estuary in the South Island.

It is an important example of this ecosystem type. It provides habitat for:

  • rare or threatened native plants and animals, and
  • important populations of coastal wetland birds and migratory wading birds.

But the values of the Waimea Inlet ecosytem have been severely degraded and a restoration project is underway.

That almost sounds worthy of looking after don’t you think?

Yes, we have neglected and subjected it to all manner of degradation for years, but now we have turned a corner and decided to restore it as best we can before we lose it altogether.  Or have we?

proposed building on edge of estuary
Proposed building

George Hilgeholt applied to the council to build this building on the edge of the estuary at Johnstone Loop near Tasman.

What is the problem with that you say?

Well, the measuring stick used to portray the building in the picture submitted for approval seems to be the same one that council used to measure the building against compliance requirements for building in such a location.

When the building is drawn to the scale that coincides with the dimensions given by the architect the picture looks slightly different. In fact, it appears to look significantly different.

the actual scale of the eyesaw to built on the estuary
Using a more accurate scale

Not only is the building significantly more of an eye saw than the submitted rendition would indicate, it seems to have a few other issues that raise red flags too.

The following questions (and more) are raised by the Save Our Shores TDC Facebook page:

The Tasman District Council is ignoring the consensus to save, more intent on invade via RMA rule manipulation … Why would you allowed a new building to be 93% noncompliant – sited 7 metres from the Mean Springs Tide Water Mark versus the TRMP regulation of 100 metres of set back in Rural 1 let alone the Coastal Overlay? Why would you allow a building to have a Waste Water Secondary treatment to be within 7m of the high tide mark and a few metres from a wetland? Why have a national Coastal Policy height restriction of 5 metres – then allow a 6.7 metre building?

They seem like good questions to me.

Farmers in the outer extremities of TDC have had large tracts of their land ring-fenced because they are wetlands of national significance. I wonder how they feel knowing that the council has little regard for estuary wetlands?

What do you think?

 

Dam Alternative Suggested

Brian Halstead, spokesman for a group of irrigators from Waimea Irrigators and Waters Users Inc, has suggested an alternative to the $82.5 million Waimea dam in the Lee Valley. The proposal is for a series of clay-lined, in-ground reservoirs along the Wairoa River to be filled during winter months. At an estimated cost of around $25 million, it is significantly cheaper than the dam option.

While that was less than half of the storage tipped for the proposed Waimea dam, it would “better serve the community and irrigators as a shorter-term measure at a fraction of the cost”.

The irrigators predict it will meet the needs of the irrigators in the Richmond / Mapua area for the next 40 years. The money generated from selling the water could also go toward paying down council debt.

The current mayor, Richard Kempthorne, welcomed the proposal and mayor hopeful, Maxwell Clark, branded it as an “excellent scheme” worthy of investigation. While Kit Maling, the other mayoral contender, was sceptical it would adequately meet the needs and did not want the dam proposal delayed because of a potential change of Government next year which could affect Government funding.

Read more here.

88 valley dam
Been here before

While this option is worth considering, I believe it is only better serving the community of irrigators, not the community as a whole. Council has already wasted an extraordinary amount of money on a temporary solution with the construction of a dam in the 88 Valley. This dam (which ran well over budget – surprisingly), has no water catchment and takes over 2 years to fill when emptied. It also drains through a swamp before the water makes its way to the river affecting the quality of water in the Wai-iti river.

The reservoir option sounds a lot like another stopgap measure that will provide short-term relief at the expense of the inevitable long-term requirement for the region.  That is 25 million (if on budget) plus the price of land purchase, on top of the millions spent in 88 valley, and still, we have the problem that the residential water supply is currently insufficient to meet current needs in dry years without accounting for future population growth.

There is no doubt that we need to meet the needs of irrigators, and soon before we have salt water intrusion into our aquifers. But can we afford to allocate another 25 million dollars on, at best, a 40-year stopgap?

I think Kit Maling is correct, we are better focusing on the dam that will future proof our water woes for years to come. Spend the money once and spend it right instead of throwing good money after bad.

What is needed is a better funding solution for the dam. Let us see some more creativity applied to that problem.

Your say?

 

Flooding Homes Needs A Vision

Council staff presented a report to council suggesting that the solution to people having their houses repeated flooded was “the development of a ‘Richmond Catchment Management Framework,'” which would be a good place to start one would imagine.  In fact, one would wonder what exactly council staff have been doing to date if they have not had a water management plan in effect? Flooding in Richmond

However, kudos for recognising that they need a management plan.  The key strategy or process that this plan revolves around one would assume to be of a constructive nature, given the time they have had to come up with a plan, one would logically conclude.  One would be wrong. The key element is, as Cherie Sivignon (Nelson Mail) reports, a “vision for the catchment.”

Oddly enough, a number of councillors thought research into a vision for water management was somewhat redundant.  The problem seems to be that every few years there is an abundance of water feeding into the catchment area that our current stormwater facilities are not able to cope with and homes and businesses end up flooded as a result. The vision surely should be managing water flows in the catchment area and upgrading the over capacitated outlet facilities.

Chief executive Lindsay McKenzie requested that the report is received  and staff be given an opportunity to reflect on the feedback. It will be interesting to hear how the feedback has resulted in constructive action from council staff, or if they hide behind more paperwork generation.

Another noteworthy outcome of the meeting appears to have been deputy mayor Tim King realising “It’s this disconnect we’ve got between what we think is important, what you’re telling us the community thinks is important and what they actually think is important.”

How many years has it taken the deputy mayor to realise that he has no idea what the community he is elected to represent actually wants?

 

 

 

Archives

Share the joy

Why Vote McNamara?

I am MOTIVATED.
I have business EXPERIENCE.
I am fiscally FRUGAL (some say tight!).
I am a born and bred LOCAL - here to stay
I am CONTACTABLE - reach me through this website.
I know together WE CAN DO BETTER.

Tags

3 waters Campground casting vote cost of the dam council councillor role dam overruns Dean McNamara Debt decisions Dr Mike Joy Easter Trading Election fine print free lunch Funding inconsistencies lie Lies Mandates McKee Memorial Reserve performance Pigeon Valley Fire rate affordability Rate increase rates Richmond risks rules Shane Jones spending stormwater strategic misrepresentation Tasman Tasman council elections Tasman District Council tdc TDC propaganda vote Waimea Community Dam Waimea dam waimea irrigators water water bylaw WIL