Dean McNamara

Transport

20/08/2019

We need a transport network that will serve the needs of Tasman residents now and into the future.

Everyone would like NZTA to sort out the State Highway issues through Richmond and into Nelson. We would also like to see the promised upgrade to Motueka back on the agenda. It is the only project outlined in the Regional Land Transport Strategy For Nelson City and Tasman District 1993 that has not been completed. Twenty Six years is long enough on the waiting list.

The Council should keep lobbying NZTA for action as there are plenty of other Councils vying for their limited funds.

But, at the same time, we need to get smarter with the way we use our roading network. It is unsustainable to keep building bigger and bigger roads to cater to single–occupancy vehicle use.-

Some say that we need to move people onto public transport as the answer in the future.

A public transport system may be a part of that future but better networking with private industry is likely to provide a more economic and more efficient service that can adapt to changing transport needs. Working together for better results.

We don’t know what the future of transport will look like. But we do know that it will look very different from the transport of today. Until about the 1930s, coastal shipping was the main method of transporting people and goods around New Zealand. Newmans were running horse–drawn coaches up until 1918. Since then we have progressed to 50 plus tonne trucks and electric cars.

Looking to the future, we already have the technology for self-drive cars, uber is trialling automated passenger drones. It would not be prudent for the Council to try and constrain future transport solutions to more buses, electric or otherwise. Nor would be good business practice for the Council to compete with private enterprise looking to maximise the use of new technology.

In recent months I have worked with Kate Malcolm of the Nelson Tasman Transport Trust and Hilary Bird of the Wakefield Rest Home to facilitate the establishment of a Wakefield bus service trial. While this may not be the ultimate solution to our transport woes, it does show that public/private partnerships can operate well (if locals support the service!).

We also need to rethink the way we deliver cycleways in the region. With the advent of e-bikes and various other forms of electric powered people movers the older generation is far more mobile even when they are not able to use cars. These vehicles have a range of up to 50 kms. So why do we not build “cycleways” that are both wide enough and properly constructed to accommodate mobility scooters and bikes. Is this a case of less is more, and a job worth doing is worth doing right?

Relieving traffic congestion and reducing greenhouse gases needs a more holistic look at what we are doing with our transport network. More of the same just won’t cut it, Tasman deserves Better.

Business

14/08/2019

We have a strong primary production industry in Tasman that we need to support, but we need to encourage more value adding businesses. We need to encourage innovative technologies to support our traditional industries, encourage cottage industries and help them progress to larger businesses.

Tasman needs greater engagement with youth, and businesses need to help provide our youth with pathways to skilled employment. For too long the youth of Tasman have had to leave the region to train and utilize their skills. It then becomes an expensive and often futile exercise to attract them back to this region.

Business collaboration and working with partners for growth opportunities need to be explored more.

What can the Tasman District Council do to facilitate better a business environment?

One of the major problems in this region is housing, and affordable housing. Another is the “sunshine wages” culture that this region has become infamous for. Businesses need to step up and pay a living wage in conjunction with the Council working harder to encourage more affordable housing options.

The Council needs to create a more stable and supportive environment for business to operate in.
The Council needs to develop an economic development plan with a holistic view of the region.
The Council needs to stop subsidizing selected businesses at the expense of other businesses.
The Council needs to stop providing services that compete with private enterprise.

The Tasman region is more than a handful of irrigators on the Waimea plains and a collection of large retirement villages. Tasman District Council needs to broaden its vision for our region.

Tasman needs a diverse economy, more jobs paying higher wages, and a council with a more holistic approach to the region.
Dean Mcnamara for mayor

Tasman District Council needs to create an environment that facilitates co-funding, resources and training for business startups. But we need to elect a council that understands that subsidising businesses is not the same as giving grants or providing resources for entrepreneurs to develop a business. A prime example of this is the recent decision to give money to subsidise electric bike recharge stations — instead of facilitating a micro business opportunity for a secure “park and charge” with bike service facilities, luggage storage, or a coffee recharge. Providing a business opportunity and saving a ratepayer subsidy.

Businesses that create value add opportunities to our primary produce, or that work in the technology sector to support our primary sector, both lift our poor GDP (we are the second-lowest region in the country) and lift our average wages (we are 14% below the national average).

We need to work together as a business community and as a community as a whole to turn our region around and recreate the vibrant and diverse community that we were once known for.

It starts with a plan. If we don’t have one we will continue to fall behind the rest of New Zealand and we will remain a district of retirement homes with a few horticulturists – not that they are bad in themselves, but we have focused on them for the past 12 years under the current Council leadership.

It is time for this Council to get its eye back on the ball with a Mayor who has some business acumen. Which is why I am voting McNamara for Mayor.

Inclusive Council

14/08/2019

Clear and honest communications. Responsibility for outcomes. Genuine Community Engagement. We need to get better at listening to the voices of Tasman residents.

I have been a part of a council that published propaganda that was neither informative nor constructive. I have been a part of council that was afraid to hold a referendum on a significant issue. I have seen us consult but not listen. I have seen significant decisions made by casting vote.

But I think we can do better as a Council. I would like to see us adopt the following points as a base on which to build our relationship with ratepayers.

Transparency – Information relating to council decisions and actions is easily accessible and easily understood, especially to those who are most effected by the decisions.

Accountability – Council assumes responsibility for the outcomes of the decisions it makes and the actions it takes.

Community Engagement – Council undertakes meaningful dialogue with the community in its decision-making processes and in shaping the vision for the Tasman District.

Inclusion – Council recognises that the Tasman community includes a diverse population dispersed across the entire region and will proactively include the needs of the entire community when distributing resources.

Starting from a position of partnership with our community would be a welcome change. Rather than spending large amounts of time and money in damage control we should take the community on the journey with us not being afraid to listen to their feedback along the way.

I believe that the people of Tasman are smart enough to make the hard decisions when presented with the facts rather than needing to be brainwashed with propaganda. We all want the Tasman district to prosper and be an enjoyable place to live for generations to come. We would also like our families to be able to afford to live here.

I am not afraid to use binding referendums on items of huge significance to the entire Tasman region. We consulted without deliberation on the Waimea Dam, and the mayor denied a referendum twice by casting vote, and yet the implications of the decision to accept the current dam funding model that has monumental rate implications for at least the next ten years. Our core service deliverability is severely restricted without significant rate increases. You should have had a say.

Vote McNamara for a council that is prepared to listen.

Waimea Dam

12/08/2019

I often get asked what my position on the Waimea Dam is.

When we were first presented with a model for the Waimea Dam I voted in favour. At that point it was more-or-less a user-pays funding model. As time progressed the funding model shifted to a public subsidisation of what is largely a private irrigation scheme. Not only in the construction costs but also in the forever ongoing running costs (ratepayer responsible for 51% of running costs) As it moved increasingly in that direction, I felt that I could no longer support the funding model.

However, it was not only the funding model that I have concerns over. I was unable to get satisfactory answers to questions I had about the longevity of the dam in relation to the rate of sediment build-up in the reservoir. If we are selling this dam as a 100 year plus solution to our water needs, then I would like to know that it will indeed have 100 years of capacity. I do not have that security of understanding from the information presented to me (or lack thereof).

Another concern is the budget allocated to certain aspects of the construction. I have experience in earthmoving so have some understanding of the mammoth task involved in operations such as clearing the reservoir of vegetation, putting in roads in unstable terrain, and complying with runoff regulations. Without direct access to the contractors to allay my concerns in how they intend to overcome some of these issues, I am suspicious of the amounts allowed for in the current budget.

Waimea Dam P95 guarantee — It can’t possibly go over $83 million dollars we have a P95

Other details we are assured are not an issue such as the lack of bedrock and reservoir wall stability do not line up with anecdotal evidence. The fact that no scientific study has been conducted into the path of the water into the aquifers nor the capacity of flow into the aquifers does not inspire confidence that releasing water into the river is going to solve the over allocation of pumping from the aquifers either. Nor was the fact that I was unable to get decommissioning cost allocation inserted into the Term Sheets, leaving future ratepayers exposed to the entire cost of the dam clean up at some point in the future.

Finally, I found it absurd that the irrigators were in-charge of the dam office during the stages of contractor procurement and final design of the dam when the irrigators had a capped contribution funding model. Whether they are corrupt or not, this situation leaves open a lot of room for accusation should it come to light that the budget is insufficient. It is thrust further into murky waters when Councillors were ruled ineligible for dam directorships (because of conflicted interests) but irrigators were appointed directors (surely a far greater conflict?).

The result of all this left me in a position where I could not support the current model of the Waimea Dam. I think it carries too much risk burden for the benefit to the ratepayer.

However, moving forward it is important to ensure that any cost overruns are not just borne by ratepayers and we make the most of the deal that has been dealt. The Waimea Dam could be an asset to the Tasman region but the loading of dam related expenses onto the general ratepayer must stop. The ones benefiting the most need to be the ones paying the most.

Water

12/08/2019

We grew up in Tasman with an abundance of freshwater, but times have changed. We need to get smarter with our water use. Houses need to install rainwater collection tanks, this increases resilience in the community, and it decreases the load on stormwater systems and the waste of freshwater flushed straight out to sea. There are opportunities to improve the way we handle wastewater and greywater, both as individuals and as a district.

Nitrates and other contaminants need to be more carefully managed and monitored in the Tasman region. We cannot keep burying our head in the sand along with all the other rubbish that is being buried out of sight and all the while leaching into our aquifers.

We need to do better at protecting the health of our river water and to stop the leaching of chemicals into our aquifers. But farmers and gravel extractors are not the only ones to blame as residential streams contain some of the highest levels of contaminants. We all need to clean up our act because Tasman waterways deserve better.

WATER TANKS

During the recent drought, there were a lot of people asking why the Council doesn’t make water tanks mandatory, or that the Council should buy water tanks in bulk and offer them at a subsidised rate.

To any rational person, the concept of each house having its own water tanks seems to be a no brainer. This is what I thought when I moved the motion in a Council meeting that water tanks should be compulsory on new builds – this was before Lower Queen Street had thousands of new homes built.

But the Mayor and his cohorts blocked my move.

There were several reasons thrown up for why would couldn’t make rainwater tanks compulsory. The mayor said it would be too expensive for first home buyers but apparently didn’t that concern him when making rural builds install three 25 thousand litre tanks (with two of those solely dedicated to firefighting storage). Another objection was the lack of space, however, there are many innovative solutions such as under driveways, garages, or in garage walls to overcome the space issue.

Expensive to treat and plumb was another objection for rainwater systems. But a full-blown treated supply integrated into the house is only one option. Water can be recycled into the house for non-potable uses such as washing machines and toilet flushing. The water could be used to wash cars and water gardens or stored for drought situations to increase network resilience.

Rainwater could even just be collected in tanks and released through drip-feed lines. One of the greatest impacts of development has been to drain swamps for agriculture and to channel water into fast-flowing streams. Our urban development channels most rainwater into pipes that head straight out to sea. Anything we can do to both relieve the sudden surge of stormwater into our pipe infrastructure and the exaggerated effect to the estuary must be beneficial. Not to mention any aquifer recharge that might be encouraged through slow–release systems.

The other obvious benefit is that once the full impact of the dam hits the water rates a tank reticulation system will soon pay for itself.

Tasman water is a precious commodity and it deserves a better level of respect. Join the other voters that think we need a Council with more than one last-century-solution for water issues facing the Tasman region.

Transport

Business

Inclusive Council

Waimea Dam

Water

Fantastic Speech

You Rock

keep sticking it to them

Share the joy

Councillor McNamara: As Reported In The News

Archives

Share the joy

Why Vote McNamara?

Tags